Lugging around a big DSLR

[K C]

I have traditionally carried PAS cameras while backpacking long mileages, but when going somewhere special like AK, day hiking in NP's I usually carry a DSLR. I'm a Nikon guy and have been through about 15 bodies. Right now I am shooting with a D600 and don't see getting anything else, I haven't used anything better, at the moment I have gotten rid of all my PAS cameras. I plan on doing a Rae Lakes loop solo next month and am considering bringing my D600 with a 16-35mm or 24-120 F/4, I also have the 28mm 1.8G. I a considering getting a Canon G7X. Anyone else lugging around a 3-4 pound kit for 40-50 miles? My base weight will be about 6-8 pounds without camera gear.

[Bob Gross]

It depends on what kind of photography you do. There is a lot of scenery in the Rae Lakes area. Are you a sunset panorama shooter? Sometimes there can be black bears or bighorn sheep in the area. Are you a wildlife shooter?

If you are the panorama type, then you may be carrying shorter lenses, a tripod, and all sorts of stuff to support that. Alternatively, if you are the wildlife type, then you need something that you can whip out and shoot in a few seconds. So, based on which type I'm after for a particular trip, I generally carry my camera in a long holster on a shoulder strap.

I've done some backpacking trips when the total weight of my camera gear was greater than everything else I was carrying. In fact, it was only by having ultralightweight skills that I was able to pull it off.

–B.G.–

[Dale Wambaugh]

Ive been through many variations on the theme over 40 years of hauling cameras up to 4×5. It simply comes down to how bad you want the high quality photograph: the weight, the bulk, time spent setting up and re-packing, risk to equipment and so on.

One way is to ask if it is a photo trip or a recreational trip. IMHO, a PAS is for "shots of record," saying "I was here, this is what it looked like, this is what we looked like." I use my phone or PAS as a visual notepad too, recording flora and geologic curiosities to be identified later, or telling a story in a blog where HQ photos are too bandwidth and storage intensive. A PAS is appropriate for the recreational trip where you (and your companions) don't want to be tied up taking photographs.

[Nico .]

I used to carry around a SLR and a couple of lenses on every trip. After most of my camera equipment was lost in a burglary, I made the eventual switch over to digital. No longer desiring to carry around a bunch of heavy lenses and a large camera body, I initially started out carrying a Canon G series P&S camera. I was never really satisfied with the image quality though and was constantly hoping for something better (without resorting to a full size DSLR).

For the last ~5 years or so, I've been carrying an assortment of small primes and one of several Sony mirrorless bodies. For photography oriented trips, I've found these cameras and some of the available lenses to be an acceptable compromise between the desired DSLR-like quality of the images (and manual controls on the camera) while still having a smaller packed size/weight for a versatile kit. For a ~36-hour Rae Lakes Loop trip a couple of years ago, I carried this set-up and was happy to have it along. I'm not sure of the total weight of my camera kit for these types of trips (I don't bother to weigh much of my gear), but I'd guess it was in the 3lbs range.

That being said, for trips where photography is likely to be less of a focus or I just don't want to be carrying the added weight/bulk, I've been toying with the idea of picking up one of the older versions of the Sony RX100 P&S as a "everyday carry" sort of camera. These cameras still have above average image quality (high quality 1" sensor, RAW capability, etc), a good selection of manual controls, and a decent focal range while being small enough to fit in a belt pouch.

[Author]

Posts